Get Started Right Away!Schedule your first consultation with the firm now.

Name

Please enter your name.

Email

This isn't a valid email address.

Please enter your email address.

Phone

This isn't a valid phone number.

Please enter your phone number.

You entered an invalid number.

Are you a new client?

Please select an option.

Message

Please enter a message.

I accept the terms and conditions of this disclaimer.

The submission of this website form does not constitute an attorney-client
relationship. Unless a formal relationship has been established in writing,
the information presented throughout this site, and any response to this
web inquiry, either verbal or in writing, should be considered for informational
purposes only, and any information provided to the firm should not be
viewed as privileged or confidential.

The Texas Supreme Court recently issued a landmark decision that may have
a considerable impact on
asbestos-related lawsuits. The Court found that the principle of "every exposure"
is not sufficient to establish liability of a defendant in an asbestos
lawsuit. This means that plaintiffs cannot simply rely on general proof
of exposure to hold defendants liable for mesothelioma or other asbestos
diseases that are directly related to the amount and duration of exposure.

In the initial case filing,
Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific, the plaintiffs alleged negligence and product liability in the development
of mesothelioma and resulting death of the decedent. According to the
complaint, the decedent was exposed to asbestos from various sources from
the 1960s through the mid-1980s, from personally working with asbestos
products like Georgia Pacific drywall joint compound, asbestos cloth at
Knox Glass, and brake pads and other vehicle parts at Palestine Contractors,
as well as secondary exposure from his father's clothing, who worked
at Knox Glass.

The decedent was diagnosed with mesothelioma at age 40 in 2002, and died
as a result of his condition in 2003. His family then filed a lawsuit
against Georgia Pacific and other defendants. The case went to trial in
2006, with the jury ruling in favor of the plaintiffs and awarding about
$6.8 million in compensatory damages and $4.8 million in punitive damages.

Georgia Pacific appealed the decision with the Texas Court of Appeals,
which found in the defendants' favor. The Appeals Court concluded
that the evidence brought by the plaintiffs was insufficient to establish
the defendants' fault.

The plaintiffs then appealed to the Texas Supreme Court, which upheld the
decision made by the Appeals Court.

The Texas Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs had failed to establish
sufficient evidence of causation. The Court held that the plaintiffs needed
to establish defendant-specific evidence of the approximate exposure dose
and how this dose played a substantial role in causing the decedent's
medical condition. According to the Court, the amount of exposure must
be sufficient enough to establish causation. Simply proving "any
exposure" or "every exposure" was not enough to hold the
defendants liable in this case, which involved a dose-related disease
like mesothelioma. Further, the Court held that proof of exposure alone
was not sufficient to hold the defendants liable. Additional proof would
be necessary, based on a preponderance of evidence, of the extent of exposure
that would have been the primary cause of the decedent's condition.

This decision may prove to influence future asbestos litigation in Texas
and across the U.S., primarily related to the evidence of exposure required
to hold asbestos manufacturers and other defendants accountable for mesothelioma,
asbestosis, lung cancer and other asbestos-related diseases.

Asbestos exposure is now known to cause these deadly diseases, but prior
to the 1970s it was not widely regulated in the U.S. Today, asbestos is
recognized as a carcinogen (cancer-causing substance) and is closely regulated.
Lawsuits continue to arise, however, because of the long latency period
of asbestos-related diseases. Mesothelioma may not develop for as many
as 50 years after initial exposure, or longer in some cases.

If you would like to learn more about asbestos litigation and your rights
if you have a history of asbestos exposure, now is the time to talk to
a Houston personal injury lawyer at The Daspit Law Firm. These are complex
matters, but our team has the resources and experience to seek successful
results on our clients' behalf. To get started, call for a free consultation
and case review.

Main Office

440 Louisiana Street
Suite 1400
Houston,
TX
77002

Galveston Office

2519 Market St
Galveston,
TX
77550

Beaumont Office

505 W. Lucas Drive
Beaumont,
TX
77706
*By Appointment Only

The information on this website is for general information purposes only.
Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual
case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt
or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.